Ecosystem Fund is similar to the Development Fund and can be used to onboard resources to the protocol
1 Like
Message received, the most active members of BabelFish’s young community belong to Sovryn and/or BCW, and we want to be as inclusive as possible in this bootstrap phase to jumpstart the protocol.
We will brainstorm further on the mechanics of these two sales and the allocation to Sovryn’s AMM to accommodate in a sustainable way. We hope to have a fruitful debate on Monday’s BabelFish call before a final draft is posted here for a further round of debate.
8 Likes
I feel weird that the two people who liked my post are called “Traitor” and “an_idiot”. Can someone with the screen name “next level genius” please like my comments?
9 Likes
I do not understand the complaints from some Sovryn community members. The way I see it Sovryn is a decentralised platform that Babel Fish is using to launch on. Babel Fish as the project that wants to use the Sovryn platform is free to choose how they want to conduct the launch. If they make a deal with a group or individual to get first pick in a sale it is their choice. If they’ve made a deal with BCW then they’ve done that in their interest but we’re not privy to that. They should be commended for making it public how the sale will be conducted. They’ve probably already received funds from seed rounds - were Sovryn community involved in this? Of course not! The main thing here is that Sov is having the first project launching on the platform, which is huge and validates what the team is doing!!
18 Likes
There’s obviously a risk of collusion with any group of people, the answer is equitable distribution. Prioritising a pre existing unrelated group over those demonstrably engaged with the parent chain isn’t the way to achieve that.
1 Like
Completely agree - equal treatment seems entirely reasonable/justified to me.
I think there are some good points made. But fair launch doesn’t mean anything anymore. The word is often just used so more ppl can join in without actually contributing anything. I don’t care if early supporters are a group, a community, a VC, or anything. They should be rewarded for the value and support they contributed.
4 Likes
I would vote yes if Sov Stakers were allowed to participate day one. This project is very interesting.
2 Likes
If there is an upvote button, I would smash it. Stay Sovryn!
1 Like
In my opinon Babelfish on SOV is a good thing regardless of how they conduct their sales. Voting no just because you were not involved in their pre-sale is a vote for only yourself and not one with the project in mind
8 Likes
It’s funny how some people says BCW is “unrelated” when most, if not all of them are SOV stakers
Sounds more like sour grapes to me if you ask.
Anyhow, just put it to a vote i suppose and we shall find out
8 Likes
In which case there’s no problem with the requirement for day one sale being staking SOV.
1 Like
Like i said, let’s put it to a vote and we shall find out
1 Like
More and more, it is becoming clear to me that Sovryn is more than a dapp. Its an entire financial OS. So seeing additional projects and communities build on it and spring from it is an important validation of this view.
I understand that a big part of the Babel community hail from BCW. I have become more familiar with the BCW community over the last few months, after they became early supporters of Sovryn and have been consistently impressed by them. So it is great to see that there is strong overlap. I also, understand the Babelfish desire to reward their community and bring in more members of BCW.
That said, Sovryn is providing a lot of support to Babelfish and, to my mind, that should be better reflected in this SIP. Specifically, I would like to see Babel provide a reward to SOV stakers - and given the investment of resources from Sovryn, I think this could justifiably go beyond participation in the sale.
One thing that babel have suggested is providing a grant of FISH to Sovryn, to be used for liquidity mining. I think this kind of win-win makes a great deal of sense.
24 Likes
Given the large amount of tokens allocated for liquidity mining (45%), I’d like to see more details on their possible distribution methods and their vesting periods before making a decision. It’s needless to say that from your unlock schedule chart, we can see the initial sale investors will be heavily diluted if large portion of the liquidity mining category will not only be unlocked, but also distributed further. That’s something to keep in mind for the early community’s sake, as you’re still able to tweak or potentially change the proposal.
To comment on the topic of BCW, usually I wouldn’t support big paid groups getting preferential treatment, but having seen their involvement and early community-forging with Sovryn, I truly think this is a different scenario. I understand some people are unhappy that one round is specifically reserved for them - maybe we could balance this out by providing Sovryn stakers with a bonus of some sort, as Yago mentioned above. Instead of a plain airdrop, which might come as the first idea, I would suggest a multiplier for a period of time when using Babelfish and obtaining the tokens this way (I reckon this will come from the liquidity mining category). To give an example, Sovryn stakers would earn 10-30% more $FISH tokens when using the platform for a limited amount of time. Maybe this is the extra little care some people feel they deserve. Although keep in mind any committed Sovryn staker would be included in this bonus - I assume that means many BCW members too.
17 Likes
Great suggestions. This would be fair.
Anyone who stakes before the voting should be allowed to participate on Day 02.
4 Likes
Great idea. Incentivises behaviour that is in Babel’s interest.
2 Likes
Didn’t BCW Premium membership also stop accepting new members a couple weeks back? So we can’t join BCW even if we wanted to.
While I appreciate BCW, they effectively have a closed group that is trying to exclusively prioritize themselves. It’s a little bit of an eye roll.
I’m extremely excited for BabelFish, but I personally wouldn’t vote for the SIP as is.
1 Like